This website uses cookies to help us give you the best experience when you visit our website. By continuing to use this website, you consent to our use of these cookies. For full details visit https://www.iainabernethy.co.uk/legal-information

This website uses cookies to help us give you the best experience when you visit our website. By continuing to use this website, you consent to our use of these cookies. For full details visit https://www.iainabernethy.co.uk/legal-information

Now when Jeff gave me permission to use his list in the HeianFlowSystem he told me (I have printed copies of our email exchanges) that it had come from a steering group looking into European violence. he unfortunately no longer had a reference for it and I have since been unable to find one. I used a modified (and unprioritised) version of said list in my more recent PinanFlowSystem series of books based on my observations of behaviour in CCTV footage and Emergency Department reports of injuries along with the little glimpses of behaviour patterns we get in various home office reports. There is however to my knowledge no current Home Office' list of HAOV in order of liklihood or MA text/research including a list with firm evidence indicating any weighting.

Here is an excerpt from the PinanFlowSystem Volume Two:

The majority of the data on violent crime that I have studied over the last fourteen years comes from the British Crime Survey, the Scottish Crime Survey, Home Office reports on various Violent Crime Initiatives, Hospital Emergency Department reports on violent crime injuries, the Crime Survey in England and Wales, news reports, CCTV footage and data provided by the FBI on their website. The often unconscious behaviour patterns of participants in the high-adrenaline scenario simulation training that I have run for people from a broad range of backgrounds has corroborated a significant amount of that data and footage.

Victim approached and threatened with a weapon. The weapon might then be hidden allowing the attacker to lead the victim away. Such attacks rely on compliance through intimidation. There may be opportunities to escape through physical or vocal means in some instances.

A silent or rushing approach was made from behind, the victim grabbed in a headlock and then dragged away.

A silent or rushing approach was made from behind, the victim grabbed round the waist and then dragged away.

Victim pinned to a wall with a throat grab with the attacker's left hand and threatened with a weapon. The weapon might then be hidden allowing the attacker to lead the victim away. Such attacks rely on compliance through intimidation. There may be opportunities to escape through physical or vocal means in some instances.

Attacker grabbed the victim's hair with his left hand, and victim dragged away.